Guinness - not vegetarian friendly!!!

one-angry-dwarf

Just in case anyone is unaware of this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guinness (scroll down to 4. guiness and health)

Apparently Guinness use small quantities of fish bladder in the filtration process. Wikipedia claims this means it's unsuitable for vegans but the way i understand it, it seems as though killing fish is involved and so guinness isn't veggie friendly. As a vegetarian myself though I don't think I'll be giving it up anytime soon. As long as I don't find any scales floating in my pint anyway!

orestes

An uncle of mine is vegetarian and he doesn't drink guinness, apparently they use animal bone marrow in the fermentation process or something like that. I don't know the details (I, rather ironically considering the idea here, am not vegetarian but don't drink guinness anyway) but he seemed pretty certain and was rightly p!ssed off about having to give up the black stuff when he found out

cozmik

one-angry-dwarf wrote: »

As a vegetarian myself though I don't think I'll be giving it up anytime soon.

You're either a vegetarian or not, there's no middle ground.

Slaphead07

cozmik wrote: »

You're either a vegetarian or not, there's no middle ground.

The fact that Guinness (and most wines) are not veggie friendly is well known but I think it's better for people to answer to their own conscience rather than somebody else's.

Nature Boy

I drink Guinness and still consider myself to be veggie. You have to draw the line somewhere. If you were to cut out everything that involves animal creulty in any way you'd probably make your life very unliveable (not sure if that's a word!).

Saruman

cozmik wrote: »

You're either a vegetarian or not, there's no middle ground.

Well thats not true. It depends on your reason. There are plenty of veggies out there that are only that way for health reasons. I myself was pescatarian so i only ate fish. Pretty much because i can not eat red meat so i tried giving up all meat and stuck with veg and some fish.

vektarman

orestes wrote: »

An uncle of mine is vegetarian and he doesn't drink guinness, apparently they use animal bone marrow in the fermentation process or something like that. I don't know the details (I, rather ironically considering the idea here, am not vegetarian but don't drink guinness anyway) but he seemed pretty certain and was rightly p!ssed off about having to give up the black stuff when he found out

Great story LOL but not true, I work in Guinness and can assure you that no bone marrow is used, however Guinness, like almost every other brewer, use fish finings so it's not just Guinness that's not veggie friendly, I hope I didn't burst all you lager lovers bubble.

cozmik

Saruman wrote: »

There are plenty of veggies out there that are only that way for health reasons. I myself was pescatarian so i only ate fish. Pretty much because i can not eat red meat so i tried giving up all meat and stuck with veg and some fish.

It's a good thing to decrease the intake of meat for health reasons, however if you still eat fish then you're not a vegetarian!

Nature Boy

vektarman wrote: »

however Guinness, like almost every other brewer, use fish finings so it's not just Guinness that's not veggie friendly, I hope I didn't burst all you lager lovers bubble.

I don't think that's true. As far as I know there are a lot of lagers that are veggie.

kraggy

cozmik wrote: »

It's a good thing to decrease the intake of meat for health reasons, however if you still eat fish then you're not a vegetarian!

They weren't claiming to be a vegetarian.

Mentalmiss

www.gonchong.co.uk/vegbeer.html
Shortcut to: http://tastebetter.com/features/booze/type=beer

This is a list of beers that are suitable. There are some common ones (such as bud) here.

This is for wine
Shortcut to: http://tastebetter.com/features/booze/type=wine

This is for hard liquor
Shortcut to: http://tastebetter.com/features/booze/type=liquor
Jameson is one of the few dodgy ones here.

cozmik

kraggy wrote: »

They weren't claiming to be a vegetarian.

huh?

Nature Boy wrote: »

I drink Guinness and still consider myself to be veggie.

orestes

vektarman wrote: »

Great story LOL but not true, I work in Guinness and can assure you that no bone marrow is used, however Guinness, like almost every other brewer, use fish finings so it's not just Guinness that's not veggie friendly, I hope I didn't burst all you lager lovers bubble.

Cool, I'l let him know that so, he'll be bloody delighted! Cheers man!

Tar.Aldarion

Yeah, I don't drink Guinness because it is not vegetarian.

I drink Guinness and still consider myself to be veggie. You have to draw the line somewhere. If you were to cut out everything that involves animal creulty in any way you'd probably make your life very unliveable (not sure if that's a word!).

It isn't about cutting out animal cruelty, a person can be vegetarian for many different reasons, and not care about animals at all. If I eat things with gelatin etc in them am I vegetarian, can I be vegetarian if I just eat one meat? It's what you eat. You vile pescetarian.

Nature Boy

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Yeah, I don't drink Guinness because it is not vegetarian.

It isn't about cutting out animal cruelty, a person can be vegetarian for many different reasons, and not care about animals at all. If I eat things with gelatin etc in them am I vegetarian, can I be vegetarian if I just eat one meat? It's what you eat. You vile pescetarian.

Lots of animals are killed in the production of vegetables and probably lots of other non meat foods. Does that mean you're not a veggie if you eat them?

Tar.Aldarion

Yes. Do you not grow all your own food too?

kraggy

cozmik wrote: »

huh?

You quoted Saruman not Nature Boy in that post. That's what i was referring to.

Not looking for a fight. I'm a vegetarian pacifist!

kraggy

Nature Boy wrote: »

Lots of animals are killed in the production of vegetables and probably lots of other non meat foods. Does that mean you're not a veggie if you eat them?

I see your point Nature Boy but i think there's a difference between insects inadvertently being killed in the growing of crops and fish being purposely used in the actual production of Guinness.

I'm not on my high chair, just pointing it out.

Tar.Aldarion

My joking from before aside, the diffennce I see in this is the same as Kraggy, I have to live with some animals dying from some of the foods I eat, I won't however eat or drink a product where an animal was killed on purpose for its production.

Nature Boy

What's the difference? Either way you know the animals will die.

rockbeer

Why the obsession with labels?

kraggy

Nature Boy wrote: »

What's the difference? Either way you know the animals will die.

So why not eat meat then?

Nature Boy

kraggy wrote: »

So why not eat meat then?

Because it's within my capabilities to do so.

Tar.Aldarion

I believe what he is saying is that 'What's the difference? Either way you know the animals will die.' is the equivalent of 'why not eat meat, the animal dies anyway'.
If you say 'Because it's within my capabilities to do so.' then that suggests that you do not have the cpability to not drink guinness? :-)

Nature Boy

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

If you say 'Because it's within my capabilities to do so.' then that suggests that you do not have the cpability to not drink guinness? :-)

Yes, that's exactly what I mean. There are certain things I cannot give up such as beer, wine, vegetables, and so on.

XRazorbladesX

Oh My God I never knew that!:eek:

Tar.Aldarion

That's your decision. With most beers and ciders, and some wines being vegetarian friendly, I don't see why they in particular would be hrd to change, unless you only like them.
The way I see it, if I can give up meat, which is all I ate and liked for 18 years of my life, then I can give up anything.
Why were all the good sweets ridden with gelatine?

XRazorbladesX

I miss my Haribos...Been a veggie for 2 years and I love it...But now I'm kinda pissed off

Tar.Aldarion

Somebody gave me a pack of haribo and they have ben sitting in my room for 6 months. I love them, must give them to somebody...

XRazorbladesX

lol...meat is total murder

one-angry-dwarf

cozmik wrote: »

You're either a vegetarian or not, there's no middle ground.

you do have to draw your own line somewhere though. for me, i consider myself vegetarian because i don't consume meat, gelatin etc. guinness doesn't contain any fish bits, they're just used in the process. i guess it just depends on your reason for becoming vegetarian. if you are morally against killing animals or just don't like the thought of eating dead animals. i became vegetarian for the latter, although i do have a problem with the way animals are raised and slaughtered. it's all about drawing your own line. if you don't eat meat, you're vegetarian. any measures you take beyond that (not drinking guinness, not wearing leather, cutting out dairy, not using mousetraps or flyspray etc) are the boundries you set for yourself.

cozmik

one-angry-dwarf wrote: »

it's all about drawing your own line.

Defining yourself as "vegetarian" while still consuming products such as Guinness that are known to be not vegetarian friendly has more than a whiff of hypocrisy about it, but I guess that doesn't matter since it's all about drawing our own lines :P

Sorry I just find it pretty frustrating when people try to muddy up definitions to make them suit whatever they're comfortable with.

The heart of the matter here is that for some people giving up Guinness would be too big a lifestyle change to cope with and it would be much easier to give the meaning of vegetarianism a little tweaking.

Nature Boy

cozmik wrote: »

The heart of the matter here is that for some people giving up Guinness would be too big a lifestyle change to cope with and it would be much easier to give the meaning of vegetarianism a little tweaking.

Ok if you want to make that argument then can you find a definition of vegetarianism that backs up your argument? The oxford compact dictionary says it is a person who does not eat meat . That means we can eat fish, chicken, gelatine, and we certainly can drink Guinness. Dictionary.com says a vegetarian sometimes does not eat food derived from animals which again covers drinking Guinness.

And if you really want to be picky then Guinness doesn't actually have any animal food in it so technically it is vegetarian even if you use the strictest defnition

Nature Boy

D'ya know what? This comes up all of the time. I think we should start a new thread with the aim of coming up with a common definition of vegetariamism for the use of this forum and post it in the forum charter (maybe that's a job for the new moderators )

For me, the definition would be the same as one-angry-dwarf's definition; someone who does not eat animal flesh, anything after that is optional.

meglome

Personally I never ate that much meat, mostly as the mother was a dreadful cook and I got out of the habit. Since then I've learned to love food too much, I'll almost eat anything once it's been properly prepared. I don't overeat but almost any food is good to me. I can respect vegetarians for their principled stance but I've found the majority of vegetarians I know have issues with food that goes beyond just animal welfare. Although that’s a discussion for another time.

Don’t get me wrong as the animals at the top of the food chain I think it's great that we can choose. But I agree with some of the posters, that it has to be a personal decision. I think you can be a vegetarian without being super anal about it. I mean if you didn’t go near anything that involved any animal/fish/bird/insect suffering I hate to think what would be left. IMHO not drinking Guinness because fish extracts are used in the filtering process is a step too far. Then I’m not a vegetarian so…

rockbeer

It's an old chestnut.

Personally, I think "vegetarian" is more useful as a description of food than a label for people. If people could overcome the need to tag themselves with the "vegetarian" label, it would remove much of the confusion. We could argue over the merits of different food without always ending up accusing each other of hypocrisy and double standards.

Nature Boy

Yeah it is a pity that we need labels. If only everyone was a vegetarian, then everything would be easier...

cozmik

Nature Boy wrote: »

Ok if you want to make that argument then can you find a definition of vegetarianism that backs up your argument? The oxford compact dictionary says it is a person who does not eat meat . That means we can eat fish, chicken, gelatine, and we certainly can drink Guinness. Dictionary.com says a vegetarian sometimes does not eat food derived from animals which again covers drinking Guinness.

And if you really want to be picky then Guinness doesn't actually have any animal food in it so technically it is vegetarian even if you use the strictest defnition

lmao, You think it's ok for vegetarians to eat fish and chicken !? and then you accuse me of being picky lol

Yeah it is a pity that we need labels. If only everyone was a vegetarian, then everything would be easier...

It's more a pity that some people think fish and chicken do not count as animal flesh.

Nature Boy

cozmik wrote: »

lmao, You think it's ok for vegetarians to eat fish and chicken !? and then you accuse me of being picky lol


It's more a pity that some people think fish and chicken do not count as animal flesh.

You completly missed my point. Of course I don't think it's ok for vegetarians to eat fish and chicken, I was simply pointing out that the dictionary thinks it is. You said that you feel frustrated "when people try to muddy up definitions to make them suit whatever they're comfortable with" so I was just pointing out what the definition of vegetarianism actually is, which I don't think anyone here would aggree with so I guess we have to "muddy" up our own definitions.

oblivious

Its finings (isinglass), from fish swim bladders they used, so do lot of brewers. It does not stay in the beer as it binds to proteins and precipitates them out, thus clarifying the beer,which does not come through in the final product.

rockbeer

Nature Boy wrote: »

Yeah it is a pity that we need labels. If only everyone was a vegetarian, then everything would be easier...

But with the greatest respect, why do you think we 'need labels'?

Tar.Aldarion

It is a needed convention in society.
If there is not a vegetarian label on food, it is more complicated to order, and to know if something is vegetarian. If there are no such people as vegetarians, companies will not mke products aimed at them, there would not even be food labeled as such. Without labels things can't fuction well. They make life simpler.

cozmik

cozmik wrote: »

Defining yourself as "vegetarian" while still consuming products such as Guinness that are known to be not vegetarian friendly has more than a whiff of hypocrisy about it, but I guess that doesn't matter since it's all about drawing our own lines :P

It is impossible to know if your veg have been grown without the use of fertilizers containing bone and fishmeal, unless you can grow your own.
The calves that were needed to produce the dairy veggies consume will be killed for the favour. etc.
So if you want to look at it that way being a hypocrite is part and parcel of being of veggie.

sweet-rasmus

i though we had this 'labels' argument already!! ah well...

meglome

meglome wrote: »

I can respect vegetarians for their principled stance but I've found the majority of vegetarians I know have issues with food that goes beyond just animal welfare. Although that’s a discussion for another time.

I assume you are hinting at anorexia here?
Vegetarianism is a common tactic to allow teenage anorexics to allow them to take control over their calorific intake.
It simply a guise.

In fact I would go so far as to say the opposite. Young Veggie's are much more likely to have a healthy balanced diet, because the choice encourages people to learn to cook and think about their nutrition.

cozmik

Nature Boy wrote: »

You completly missed my point. Of course I don't think it's ok for vegetarians to eat fish and chicken, I was simply pointing out that the dictionary thinks it is.

Well you should find a better source to make you're point understood because the dictionary is talking out of it's ass.

kind regards

cozmik

cozmik

Moonbaby wrote: »

It is impossible to know if your veg have been grown without the use of fertilizers containing bone and fishmeal, unless you can grow your own.

Maybe so , but as far as Guinness goes it's a known fact that they use fish finings in production.

rockbeer

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

It is a needed convention in society.

It's a convention, but I'd take issue with it being needed.

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

If there is not a vegetarian label on food, it is more complicated to order, and to know if something is vegetarian.

Indeed, as I said above I can see value in the use of vegetarian as an adjective applied to food. This use isn't a label but a description. But even this causes confusion. How many times have people complained on this board about restaurant menu items being marked vegetarian that they don't think should be.

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

If there are no such people as vegetarians, companies will not mke products aimed at them

That's quite scary, but possibly true in modern society.

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

there would not even be food labeled as such. Without labels things can't fuction well. They make life simpler.

Maybe, but onions and oranges don't need to be marked "vegetarian" - people manage to work it out for themselves. I'd like to think they could manage the same for other foods. And does the world really need pre-fabricated veggie food? But you're still talking about the food, and descriptions of it, not the people. Why do people need to label themselves as vegetarian?

cozmik wrote:

Well you should find a better source to make you're point understood because the dictionary is talking out of it's ass.

He could hardly have found a better source to make his point, which is that the definition is not a fixed thing. You seem to to think you're in possession of the true definition of 'vegetarian'. The trouble is, everybody else thinks the same, even when they disagree with you. No definition is ever as black and white as you seem to think.

This is why labels serve to obfuscate at least as often as they clarify. I'm sure if we dig deep enough, cozmik, we'll find some behaviour of yours that would justify an accusation of hypocrisy. Not that I would want to do that, but I can't help wondering why you seem to feel the need to point the finger at others. Seems like you are defined by your vegetarianism. Why do you have such a problem with other people viewing things differently?

I dropped the veggie label and have never been happier. Still live a largely vegan life, but no one can start shouting the odds if I drink a Guinness once in a while. If you don't brand yourself, no-one can call you a hypocrite... and I got bored with all that relentless accusation and self-defence. In the end it's about what I do, not how I label myself, or what anyone else thinks about it.

oblivious

cozmik wrote: »

Maybe so , but as far as Guinness goes it's a known fact that they use fish finings in production.

Supposably so, but it does not end up in the beer

cozmik

cozmik wrote: »

Maybe so , but as far as Guinness goes it's a known fact that they use fish finings in production.

What you are saying there is that if you don't want to know about it is alright.

cozmik

rockbeer wrote: »

You seem to to think you're in possession of the true definition of 'vegetarian'.

No I don't think that at all.

rockbeer wrote: »

No definition is ever as black and white as you seem to think.

It is as far as Guinness is concerned, tbh.

Seems like you are defined by your vegetarianism.

Who said I was a vegetarian?



best,

cozmik